[ILUG] Firewall Overhead.

[kevin lyda]

On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 05:44:34PM +0100, Smelly Pooh wrote:
> Um... no, sounds like some blind Linux advocate fabricating bullshit to cover
> up another Linux shortcoming.  Stateful information a memory hog?  Excuse me,
> but the kernel buffers used to hold the tcp/udp data from connections are
> only orders of magnitude bigger.  How did you become such an expert on
> [snip rant]

first of all in your entire ad homein attack this is the only relevant
argument on your side.  it does add a level of complexity that i don't
think is needed.  as paul described one can design a network that doesn't
need it so i don't see why it should be inflicted on those who don't need
it.

and now that i recall you also mentioned that linux's userland packet
access was inefficient.  how do you justify that - do you have any
benchmarks that demonstrate that?  and my understanding is that the
networking folks working on linux have put forward a number of versions
of firewalling and packet access, so which one were you covering?  and
how would you compare them?

i'd be far more interested in a post that covered those points rather
then some rant.

kevin
-- 
kevin at suberic.net       "we were goin' for breakfast.  in canada.  we
fork()'ed on 37058400    made a deal: if she'd stop hookin', i'd stop
meatspace place: work    shootin' people.  maybe we were aiming high."
                                                   --porter, "payback"